UKRAYNA KRİZİ ve AGSP: AGSP KONUSUNA RETROSPEKTİF BİR BAKIŞ ve 1990-2000 YILLARI ARASINDA TÜRK DIŞ POLİTİKASININ BU KONUDAKİ BELİRLEYİCİLERİ

Öz

“Avrupa Güvenlik ve Savunma Kimliği” (AGSK) ile “Avrupa Güvenlik ve Savunma Politikası” (AGSP) kavramları 90’lı yılların başından itibaren BAB (Batı Avrupa Birliği) NATO, AB gibi uluslararası örgütlerin yanı sıra Türkiye'yi de yakından ilgilendiren güncel bir mesele olmuştur. AGSK/AGSP’nin inşası, konu hakkında farklı vizyonları olan ülkeler arasında hararetli tartışmalara sebebiyet vermiştir. AGSK/AGSP bir taraftan Atlantik İttifakı içinde, diğer taraftan eşzamanlı olarak Atlantik İttifakı dışında, diğer bir deyişle AB içerisinde de gelişme göstermiştir. Zaman içinde konuya ilişkin olarak iki karşıt eğilim ortaya çıkmıştır: Atlantikçi vizyon, AGSK/AGSP’yi NATO içinde sınırlandırmak isterken; Avrupacı vizyon ise askeri konularda NATO ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri karşısında daha müstakil hareket edebilme arayışı içerisine girmiştir. 2022 yılında başlayan Ukrayna krizinin ardından, operasyonel bir Avrupa ordusu kurulması ve etkin bir AGSP geliştirilmesine yönelik tartışmalar yeniden ve artan bir şekilde Avrupa ülkelerinin siyasi gündeminde yer bulmaya başlamıştır. AGSK/AGSP, ilk tartışılmaya başlandığı dönemden itibaren Türk dış politikası için hayati bir konu olarak görülmüş ve Türk diplomasisinin ulusal çıkarlarını korumaya yönelik uzun vadeli hedefleri arasında önemli bir yere sahip olmuştur. Bu makalede, AGSK ve AGSP’nin tarihsel gelişimi incelenerek, retrospektif bir bakış açısıyla Türkiye’nin AGSK/AGSP politikasını şekillendiren gerekçeler ve stratejiler ele alınacaktır. Bu bağlamda Türk dış politikasını şekillendiren açık ve örtülü gerekçeler arasında bir sınıflandırma yapılarak, açık gerekçeler başlığı altında Türkiye'nin çatışma bölgelerine yakınlığı ve BAB içindeki kazanımlarının korunması konuları irdelenecektir. Örtülü gerekçeler başlığı altında ise, Yunanistan ve GKRY faktörleri değerlendirilerek, Türkiye’nin çıkarları için oluşturdukları tehditlere değinilecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• AB
• Avrupa Güvenlik ve Savunma Politikası
• Batı Avrupa Birliği
• NATO
• Türk Dış Politikası.

Etik Beyan

- Bu çalışmada “Yükseköğretim Kurumları Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Yönergesi” kapsamında uyulması belirtilen tüm kurallara uyulmuştur. Yönergenin ikinci bölümü olan “Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiğine Aykırı Eylemler” başlığı altında belirtilen eylemlerden hiçbiri gerçekleştirilmemiştir. - Bu makalenin araştırılması, yazarlığı ve / veya yayınlanmasına ilişkin herhangi bir potansiyel çıkar çatışması beyan edilmemektedir.

THE RECENT UKRAINIAN CRISIS AND THE RE-ADVENT OF THE ESDP DEBATE: A RETROSPECTIVE REGARD TO THE ESDP AND DETERMINANTS OF THE TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY ON THE ISSUE BETWEEN 1990s-2000s

Öz

The "European Security and Defense Identity" (ESDI) and the "European Security and Defense Policy" (ESDP) have been debated ardently since the early 90s. The ESDI/ESDP has been a topic that closely interested Türkiye. The formulation process of ESDI/ESDP was a source of tension among the countries which had different visions on the issue. The ESDI/ESDP was developing within NATO and simultaneously within the EU. As a result, two opposing tendencies have emerged: while the Atlanticist vision wanted to limit the ESDI/ESDP within NATO; the European vision sought to act more independently vis-à-vis NATO and the United States. Following the Russian aggression against Ukraine in 2022, discussions on establishing an operational European army, and developing a more efficient ESDP have been debated frequently by the European countries’ political and military elites. Since its inception, the ESDI/ESDP has been viewed as a vital issue for the Turkish Foreign Policy (TFP), and full accession to the ESDP mechanisms constituted a significant objective for the Turkish diplomacy. In this article, the historical evolution of the ESDI/ESDP will be discussed, and a classification will be made between the explicit and implicit reasons that shaped the TFP regarding the issue. In this context, Türkiye's proximity to conflict zones, the protection of its acquired rights within WEU, its problems with Greece, the prospective accession of the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus to the EU, and the potential threats it posed to Türkiye's national security interests will be examined.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• European Security and Defense Policy
• EU
• NATO
• Turkish Foreign Policy
• Western European Union.

Etik Beyan

In this study, all the rules specified in the "Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive" were followed. None of the actions specified in the second section of the directive, "Actions Contrary to Scientific Research and Publication Ethics", were carried out.

Kaynakça

1. Ağır, B. S. (2014). Güvenlik ve Göç Kavşağında Kosova Sorunu (Kosovo Issue at the Intersection of Security and Migration). SBF Dergisi, Vol/Cilt 69, Issue/No: 3, 455 – 479. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/38034
2. Akbaba, S. (2009). Measuring EU Actorness Through CFSP and ESDP: Civilian Power EU. Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi, Vol: 8 No: 2, 1-28. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/847769
3. Aybet, G. (2000). NATO’s Developing Role in Collective Security. SAM Papers, No:4/99, Ankara, 48-61.
4. Aydemir, E. and Güner, O. (2023). Crisis management policies concerning the Russo-Ukrainian War in the European Union’s Security and defense approach: Soft power and EUAM. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review, 4(2), 189-205. Available at doi: 10.54733/smar.1223897 and https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/smar/issue/78582/1223897
5. Baykara, S. T. (2022). AB Üyesi Olmayan Bir NATO Üyesi Olarak Türkiye’nin OGSP’ndaki Rolü (Türkiye’s Role in the CSDP as a Non-EU Member of NATO). Uluslararası İlişkiler ve Diplomasi Dergisi/Journal of International Relations and Diplomacy, Cilt/Volume: 5, Sayı/Issue:1, Mart/March 2022, 1-19. Available at Doi: https://doi.org/10.51763/uid.1052299
6. Beltran, J. and Parmentier, G. (2000). L’identité Européenne de Sécurité et de Défense: De Potsdam à Helsinki en passant par Saint-Malo, Cologne et Pristina, 533-545. Available at https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/FD001182.pdf
7. Braillard, P. (1977). Théorie des Relations Internationales. PUF, Paris.
8. Cash, B. (2000). The European Security and Defense Policy: Threat to NATO. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, Volume V, Number 3, Publication of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1-9. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/816881

9. Council of Europe, (2024-a). Greece // 46 States, one Europe. Available at https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/greece
10. Council of Europe, (2024-b). Türkiye// 46 States, one Europe. Available at https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/turkey
11. Çalışkan, F. (2022). Adım Adım Rusya Ukrayna Savaşı ve Üçüncü Tarafların Sürece Etkisi (Step by step Russian-Ukrainian War and Effects of Third Parties to the Process). EURO Politika (14), 35-47. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/europ/issue/73788/1217555
12. Cem, I. (2000). L’avenir des relations entre la Turquie et l’Union européenne. Entretien avec S.E.M. Ismail CEM, Ministre des Affaires Etrangères Turques. La Revue International et Stratégique, 39, automne, PUF, 20-26.
13. Davion, I. (2022). L’Union européenne face à la guerre en Ukraine. Publié le 18.03.2022. Available at https://www.sorbonne-universite.fr/actualites/lunion-europeenne-face-la-guerre-en-ukraine
14. Demirtaş Coşkun, B. (2010). Kosova’nın Bağımsızlığı ve Türk Dış Politikası (1990-2008) (Independence of Kosovo and Turkish Foreign Policy (1990-2008)). Uluslararası İlişkiler, Vol/Cilt 7, Issue/Sayı 27, 51-86. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/540077
15. Efe, H. (2005). Avrupa Birliği’nin Ortak Dış ve Güvenlik Politikası Yaratma Çabaları ve Türkiye’ye Etkileri (European Union’s Efforts to Forge Common Foreign and Security Policy and Its Effects on Türkiye). PhD Dissertation, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Avrupa Topluluğu Anabilim Dalı. Available at http://nek.istanbul.edu.tr:4444/ekos/TEZ/40939.pdf
16. Erdoğan, M. M. (2008). Türkiye ile Avrupa Ekonomik Topluluğu / Avrupa Birliği İlişkilerinde Değişmeyen Öncelikler (Türkiye and European Economic Community/Unchanging Priorities in Relations with European Union). Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, Sayı: 51-52, 123 – 140. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/791576#609938]-791576.pdf
17. EU, (7 February 1992). Treaty of Maastricht. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:11992M/TXT
18. EU, (2 October 1997). Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts – Contents. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:11997D/TXT
19. EU, (1998). Presidency Conclusions. Vienna European Council, 11 and 12 December 1998. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en /ec/00300-r1.en8.htm
20. EU, (1999). Presidency Conclusions. Cologne European Council, 3 and 4 June 1999. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/21070/57886.pdf
21. EU, (1999). Presidency Conclusions. Helsinki European Council, 10 and 11 December 1999. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/21046/helsinki-european-council-presidency-conclusions.pdf
22. EU, (2000). Presidency Conclusions. Santa Maria Da Feira European Council, 19 and 20 June 2000. Available at https://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/fei2_en.htm
23. EU, (2000). Presidency Conclusions. Nice European Council Meeting, 7, 8 and 9 December 2000. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/00400-r1.%20ann.en0.htm
24. EU, (26 February 2001). Treaty of Nice Amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties Establishing the European Communities and Certain Related Acts. Available at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12001C/TXT&from=SV
25. EU, (2001). Presidency Conclusions. Laeken European Council, 14 and 15 December 2001. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/20950/68827.pdf
26. EU, (2002). Presidency Conclusions. Brussels European Council, 24 and 25 October 2002. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/20917/72968.pdf
27. Eurobarometer, (2023). Standard Eurobarometer 99 - Spring 2023. Available at https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3052
28. EU Commission, (2024). Statement at the European Parliament Plenary by President Ursula von der Leyen, candidate for a second mandate 2024-2029. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_24_3871
29. European Council, (2024). Where does the EU’s gas come from? Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/eu-gas-supply/
30. Eurostat, (2024-a). Government expenditure on defence. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_expenditure_on_defence#Evolution_of_.27defence.27_expenditure_over_1995-2022
31. Eurostat, (2024-b). Temporary protection for persons fleeing Ukraine - monthly statistics. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Temporary_protection_for_persons_fleeing_Ukraine_-_monthly_statistics
32. Eurostat, (2024-c). EU trade with Russia - latest developments. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?oldid=558089#:~:text=Figure%202%20shows%20that%20Russia's,from%209.4%20%25%20to%201.6%20%25.
33. Gençalp, E. (2004). Avrupa Güvenlik ve Savunma Politikası’nın (AGSP) Avrupa Güvenliğindeki Rolü ve NATO ile İlişkileri (Role of the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) in European Security and its Relations with NATO). Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), December 2004, 44-54. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cagsbd/issue/44594/553902
34. Goşu, A., and Manea, O. (2015). The consequences of the militarization of Crimea for the wider Black Sea region. Studia Politica: Romanian Political Science Review, 15(1), 9-20. Available at https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-446919 and https://d-nb.info/1192047818/34
35. Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs, (2024). Greece’s course in the EU. Available at https://www.mfa.gr/en/foreign-policy/greece-in-the-eu/greeces-course-in-the-eu.html
36. Howorth, J. (2014). Security and Defence Policy in the European Union (2nd ed.). (The European Union Series). Palgrave Macmillan.
37. Hürriyet. (25.09.2001). “Derviş: Körfez Savaşı’nda 45 milyar dolar kaybettik” (Derviş: We lost 45 billion USD in the Gulf War). Available at https://bigpara.hurriyet.com.tr/haberler/genel-haberler/dervis-korfez-savasi-nda-45-milyar-dolar-kaybettik_ID379750/
38. Lindley-French, J. (2007). A Chronolgy of European Security & Defence (1945-207). Oxford University Press, New York. NATO, (1949). North Atlantic Treaty (4 April 1949, Washington). Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm
39. NATO, (1992). Final Communiqué of the Ministerial Meeting of the North Atlantic Council (4 June 1992, Oslo). Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_23983.htm
40. NATO, (1994). Brussels Summit Communique, Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Brussels on 11 January 1994. Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_24470.htm?mode=pressrelease
41. NATO, (1996). Final Communiqué of the Ministerial Meeting of the North Atlantic Council (3 June 1996, Berlin). Available at https://www.nato.int/docu/pr/1996/p96-063e.htm
42. NATO, (1999). Washington Summit Communique, Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C. on 24 April 1999. Available at https://www.nato.int/docu/pr/1999/p99-064e.htm
43. NATO, (2000). Building European Defence: NATO's ESDI and the European Union's ESDP. NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Sub-committee on Transatlantic Defence. Report submitted by Mr. Wim Van Eekelen on 18 April 2000. Available at https://www.bits.de/CESD-PA/Parlrep-van-Eekelen-18-4-00-at-07-e.htm
44. NATO, (2004). The NATO-EU Strategic Partnership. 1-16. Available at https://www.nato.int/docu/comm/2004/06-istanbul/press-kit/006.pdf
45. NATO, (2024). The accession of Greece and Türkiye. Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.htm#gre-tur
46. Mauro, F. (2023). The War in Ukraine and Europe’s Geopolitical Awakening. Institut de Relations Internationales et Stratégique, The Europe, Strategy, Security programme, Note 17, IRIS, 1-16. Available at https://www.iris-france.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/17_ProgEurope_FMauro_EN.pdf
47. Onuch, 0. (2015). Brothers Grimm or Brothers Karamazov: The Myth and the Reality of How Russians and Ukrainians View the Other. In Pikulicka-Wilczewska, A. and Sakwa, R. (Ed.). Ukraine and Russia: People, Politics, Propaganda and Perspectives. Published by E-international Relations (Bristol, UK). Available at https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/31872699/FULL_TEXT.PDF
48. Orhun, Ö. (2000). European Security and Defense Identity - Common European Security and Defense Policy: A Turkish Perspective. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, Volume V, Number 3, Publication of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1-6. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/816873
49. Öztürk, Ş. (2023). Rusya-Ukrayna Savaşı Üzerinden Uluslararası Sisteme Dair Bir Değerlendirme (An Assessment on the International System over the Russia-Ukraine War). Dicle University Social Sciences Institute Journal, Yıl / Year: Şubat 2023, Sayı / Issue: 32, 449-462. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/diclesosbed/issue/76043/1203938
50. Pirozzi N. and Sandawi S. (2008). Five years of ESDP in Action: Operations, Trends, Shortfalls. European Security Review, ISIS Europe, No. 39. 1-4. Available at http://www.efsps.eu/docs/569esr39-5yrs-ESDP.pdf
51. Sakwa, R. (2015). Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands. I.B. Tauris, London. Szymanski, A. and Terlikowski, M. (2010). The Policy of Turkey towards EU-NATO Cooperation. The Polish Institute of International Affairs, No. 133 (209), 17 November 2010, 1-2. Available at https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/124576/a209-2010.pdf
52. Tan, Ö. (2013). Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye Güvenlik ve Savunma İlişkileri (The European Union and Türkiye Security and Defense Relations). Balkan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Vol/Cilt 2, Issue/Sayı 4, 1-13. Available at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/667893
53. Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, (1989). Dışişleri Bakanlığı 1988 Tarihçesi (1988 History of Ministry of Foreign Affairs). Dışişleri Eğitim Merkezi Başkanlığı, Ankara. 1-213. Available at https://diad.mfa.gov.tr/diad/tarihce/1988-2.pdf
54. Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (18 July 2000). Information Note on Turkish views regarding the decision adopted by the North Atlantic Council on 17 July 2000 on European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI) and Common European Defense Policy (CEDP)-BN:43, 1-4. Available at https://www.mfa.gov.tr/the-information-note-on-turkish-views-regarding-the-decision-adopted-by-the-north-atlantic-council-on-17-july-2000-on-european-security-and-defence-identity-_esdi_-and-common-european-security-and-defence-policy-_cesdp_-_br__unofficial-translation__b.en.mfa
55. Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, (2022-a). The European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and NATO-EU Strategic Cooperation. Available at https://www.mfa.gov.tr/iii_-turkiye_s-views-on-current-nato-issues.en.mfa
56. Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, (2022-b). The Aegean Problems. Available at https://www.mfa.gov.tr/sub.en.mfa?a5665231-082c-4832-abdb-46cf75694b50
57. UN, (2024). United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus. Available at https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/mission/unficyp
58. Verheyde, N.G. (1998). Joint Declaration Issued at the British-French Summit, Saint-Malo, France. (3-4 December 1998). Available at https://www.bruxelles2.eu/en/2008/01/declaration-fr-ukdest-malos-on-european-defence4-december-1998-letexte/ and https://www.cvce.eu/content/publication/2008/3/31/f3cd16fb-fc37-4d52-936f-c8e9bc80f24f/publishable_en.pdf
59. Washington Post (21 October 1980). Return of Greece to NATO Military Alliance Hailed by U.S., Allies. Available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1980/10/21/return-of-greece-to-nato-military-alliance-hailed-by-us-allies/d2c6c47b-94d1-4d68-b099-8117a80c7ca0/
60. WEU, (23 October 1954, Paris). Modified Brussels Treaty. Available at http://www.cvce.eu/obj/modified_brussels_treaty_paris_23_october_1954-en-7d182408-0ff6-432e-b793-0d1065ebe695.html
61. WEU, (1997). Assembly of Western European Union, 43rd Session. WEU’s role in the Organization of European Security after the decisions taken by the European Union in Amsterdam and by NATO in Madrid. Report submitted on behalf of the Political Committee by Mr. Jan Dirk Blaauw, Vice- Chairman and Rapporteur, on 16 October 1997. Document no :1581. 1-13. Available at https://aei.pitt.edu/53771/1/B0961.pdf
62. WEU, (2000). Western European Union Today. WEU Secretariat General, Brussels. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20121217060941/http://www.weu.int/WEU_Today2.pdf
63. World Bank, (2024). Military Expenditure (% of GDP)-European Union. Available at https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?contextual=aggregate&end=2022&locations=EU&start=1960&view=chart
64. Zandee D. and Stoetman, A. (2023). The war in Ukraine Adapting the EU’s security and defence policy. Policy Brief, Clingendael, Netherlands Institute of International Relations, July 2023. Available at https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2023-07/Policy_brief_The_war_in_Ukraine.pdf